THE US, THE UN AND IRAQ, ELEVENTH THREAD

@mysteryman,

I kind of have to agree mysteryman. I am not sure what all this stuff has to do with Iraq anyway.

0 Replies

@revelette,

And you really believed that our mission in Iraq was over? Where were you when all our military men and women continued to fight and die and/or get wounded after what GW Bush said? What mission was "accomplished?"

Word games are stupid in times of war that tries to minimize its impact on those who must continue to fight that war.

2 Replies

WORTH REPEATING

Quote:

http://www.iraqbodycount.org/database/
Documented civilian deaths from violence was 91,077 to 99,452, from the beginning of the war March 20, 2003 to February 28, 2009.

Monthly table
......2003.....2004.....2005.....2006....2007.....2008.....2009
Jan..........3.....568.....1035.....1430.....2806.....742.....275
Feb..........2.....604.....1201.....1449.....2536.....1007.....281
Mar......3976.....957.....786.....1789.....2611.....1538
Apr......3437.....1256.....1025.....1590.....2422.....1260
May......545.....619.....1226.....2103.....2734.....759
Jun......593.....833.....1215.....2426.....2086.....669
Jul.......650.....762.....1444.....3159.....2536.....583
Aug......790.....823.....2165.....2743.....325.....591
Sep......553.....943.....1330.....2408.....1221.....535
Oct......493.....947.....1201.....2924.....1185.....527
Nov......478.....1533.....1208.....2969.....1043.....472
Dec......529.....906.....996.....2662.....903.....521
Year.12,049...10,751...14,832...27,652...24,408...9,204...556

Violent deaths March 20, 2003 thru February 28, 2009 = 99,452

Approximately 90% of these deaths were murders by al-Qaeda and other terrorists trying to end the new Iraq government. The remaining 10% were mistakenly killed by coalition and Iraq government troops.

0 Replies

@mysteryman,

mysteryman wrote:

Its this kind of outlandish statement, when you use a broad brush to paint, when you have no idea what "most" conservatives do or do not do, that makes you just as bad as okie and ican.

I beg your pardon, mysteryman, I do not believe I deserve to be broadbrushed into any category or characterization with anyone like pom. If you disagree with any of my posts, I would invite you as well as I have everyone to point out the disagreement along with evidence to back your opinion. In other words, I do not think the phrase "that makes you just as bad as okie and ican" is deserved in the slightest. Primarily, I would like to know what "just as bad" applies to?

For those that care, this post serves as an illustration that I will disagree with those of my own political camp, fellow conservatives, just as I do liberals.

2 Replies

@okie,

okie, You don't even know how to read; where did anyone compare you to pom?

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

ci, you need to read the posts, okay. If you don't cut out your inane and unjustified comments, I am going to place you on ignore again.

1 Reply

@okie,

okie wrote:

Quote:

I do not believe I deserve to be broadbrushed into any category or characterization with anyone like pom.

Read my previous post again.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

ci, a tip on how to use A2K, when a post is replied to, it lists the post to which the reply is made in response to. If you would go to the post in which I replied to mysteryman, and you can do that by clicking on the name of the poster as listed in the reply, then you can read the post to which I was replying, in which mysteryman compared pom to ican and I.

So again, I took the time to correct you again, but whether you will acknowledge it, I don't know. Can you simply follow directions, do what I suggested, read the posts, and admit you are wrong?

1 Reply

@okie,

Your MO is more personal opinions to support your opinion. You obviously never learned the basic rule of debate. Your own words is not support for your own opinions.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

Can you read? It was about what mysteryman said, that I responded to, and you later denied that anyone had ever said anything like what mysteryman said. Are you getting senile, seriously ci, having a reasonable discussion with you is almost impossible. Your comprehension and ability to read posts and interpret them for what they say is almost nil. If I see no improvement, I am going to have to place you on ignore again. Sorry to have to say that, but some of the stuff you post is totally ridiculous.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

I think our mission in Iraq is just part of the perpetual war that was the backdrop for 1984.

0 Replies

@okie,

Quote:

I beg your pardon, mysteryman, I do not believe I deserve to be broadbrushed into any category or characterization with anyone like pom

I probably have 40 IQ points on him.

0 Replies

@okie,

Interesting that you can claim my posts are ridiculous when most of the challenges go your way and not mine. There's a clue there if you bother to recognize it.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

Most of the posters here are more liberal, ci, and that is why conservatives like ican, mysteryman, and I are piled onto regularly.

1 Reply

@okie,

It's not about most being liberal; it's about your posts that lacks sources and credible evidence.

0 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

CI, I suggest you read the article. The article did not say the mission is accomplised or alluded to the mission being over in any way.

To say the combat mission has come to an end because this brigade pulled out" is wrong,

Quote:

Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman told CBS News.

"We still have plenty trigger pullers there," a U.S. Army spokesman told CBS on Wednesday evening.

Anther 50,000 troops will stay in Iraq for a year, beginning in September, in what is designated as a noncombat role. They will carry weapons to defend themselves and accompany Iraqi troops on missions (but only if asked). Special forces will continue to help Iraqis hunt for terrorists.

"We're going to transition from combat operations to stability operations," U.S. military spokesman Maj. Gen. Stephen Lanza told "The Early Show" co-anchor Harry Smith Thursday.

1 Reply

@revelette,

revelette, Do you mean to tell us that those 50,000 troops in Iraq will not shoot back if shot at? They'll run around in Iraq without guns? That falls in the level of juvenile thinking. Once there is crossfire, they are "combat" troops.

1 Reply

The army are withdrawing combat troops.
And, President Karzai has said that defence contractors have to leave the country.
It would follow from that, that civilian contractors working there will not easily get insurance.

0 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

No they are simply defending themselves in the situation you describe and I imagine Iraqi troops will as well. If they (the Iraqi government) want us to leave, from what I understand, we leave.

The main issue is that Iraqis will be in charge of where they do raids and all other military operations and their country overall. Our troops that are left will be there in a supporting role. I look on all this as something good no matter if there is still ongoing violence and their government is not the best or not. I have objected all along as to what I have considered a occupation of Iraq by the US and it looks as though it finally end.

1 Reply

@revelette,

When you say "supporting role," what does that entail? No use of guns?

1 Reply

THE US, THE UN AND IRAQ, ELEVENTH THREAD

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know